Space

[Hellhound]

So three very wealthy men decide to spend some of their wealth going into space.Good on 'em.
I'd do the same and I expect millions of others would too.
Average Joe/poor people always take the moral high ground on how they think the wealthy should spend their money when in reality if it were them who were wealthy they'd do the same


Jealousy is a very toxic emotion.

Branson,Bezos and Musk could quite possible end a lot of problems for a lot of people...but.....it's not their job or moral obligation to do so!

If you are really that bothered go out there and makes £billions£ then give it away

Tonights Euromillions is £41m.If I win it no one is getting a penny but me,my wife and kids.Everyone else will be too poor to talk to me

[Tangled Metal]

Didn't JFK acknowledge directly or indirectly that Russia read ahead of USA in the space race in that speech when he put extra funds towards getting to the moon first? I was of course a long time yet to be conceived back then so it's all history to me. I could be misinformed.

[Tangled Metal]

I wonder what percentage of their income billionaires give to charity compared to those with say the people in the higher tax bands? People keep saying about billionaires giving away they're wealth but it's income that's available to give away wealth might be well be significantly tied up in the businesses that they are involved in.

Whilst they have more disposable income so perhaps should give more away I would be curious about percentage of earnings going to charity for different earning categories of even wealth categories.

Then there is the way people see wealth as making the person more selfish if they don't give more to charity. The ones committing to giving their wealth away are considered as doing the right thing. I wonder how many earning above the national average earnings give their wealth away?

Then there is the tax issues. More you earn the lower percentage of income gets paid as tax. That is a right brickbat to hit the billionaire club with. However I believe there's a significant amount of evidence suggesting that hitting the tax avoidance loopholes too hard or the wealthy,/wealth creators too hard the total tax take reduces. I'm no economist or tax expert but I've seen people who are post such information on other forums over the years. No idea how true but plausible certainly.

I can't change the billionaire's views but I can affect change through giving what I can where it will do most good. Charities do accept donations from people who are not billionaires. Perhaps concentrate on the help you can give? Time or money?
https://fareshare.org.uk/#:~:text=FareS ... y%20groups.

[cycle tramp]

Jealousy is a very toxic emotion.

Is jealousy a toxic emotion? Personally I wouldn't know. I don't suffer from it. The death of anyone who has it in their power to help people, but fail to do so is one that I can stand. They will not be mourned, and I doubt if history will treat them kindly.

[Oldjohnw]

Is there anything more utterly stupid in the world today than space tourism? Is there anything the planet needs less?

[cycle tramp]

Branson,Bezos and Musk could quite possible end a lot of problems for a lot of people...but.....it's not their job or moral obligation to do so!

Is it not a moral obligation? If I witnessed either yourself or a member of your family, drowning or attacked by thieves or requiring first aid assistance, is there not a moral obligation for me to assist in order to help them from danger and then summon further assistance?

Give the question, and yourself, a degree of credit should you answer.

Equally if you or your family were starving, due to crop failures due to global warming would there not be a measure of moral obligation from me, as I drove the car which contributed, as I consumed goods which contributed, as I heated my house that contributed to the change in weather system which caused that failure.

It seems very much to me, that the level of moral obligation set for our consumerist society, has been determined by the same set of people who are financially rich and privileged, and that this level has been set to their advantage.

[francovendee]

Beautifully put cycle tramp, I agree with every word.
It's not envy but a sense of fairness/unfairness that forms my views, not just on billionaires taking joy rides.

[Ben@Forest]

Equally if you or your family were starving, due to crop failures due to global warming would there not be a measure of moral obligation from me, as I drove the car which contributed, as I consumed goods which contributed, as I heated my house that contributed to the change in weather system which caused that failure.

Though those crop failures, causing poor environmental conditions and releasing carbon into the atmosphere are also caused by the people in those locations. The proportion may have changed but when l was at college the amount of forest being cleared globally was as much by subsistence farmers as by logging companies or large farming concerns. It's hard to blame people who live on the edge of poverty, but their actions were extremely damaging. How responsible are we for that?

Western European farming and forestry methods are generally vastly more sustainable than the slash and burn and denudation of forest land in many developing countries, whose governments are to blame?

[Vorpal]

I think that exploring space is critically import for humanity, to learn about our universe, gain new resources, and save our home planet.

I also think that in our current economic system, private investment is important; competition brings cost reductions (the current system is not ideal, but that's off topic for this thread)

It is easy to say, that we should do other things instead; feed the poor, prevent climate change, etc. But honestly, we could have all of that & space travel, too if we stopped investing so money in better ways to kill people & blow stuff up.

The proportion may have changed but when l was at college the amount of forest being cleared globally was as much by subsistence farmers as by logging companies or large farming concerns. It's hard to blame people who live on the edge of poverty, but their actions were extremely damaging. How responsible are we for that?

But subsistence farmers clear land because they can sell the wood, and use the land for something which they hope will make them more than subsistence farmers, like grazing cattle, or raising cash crops.

The solution is support them in sustainable practices with national & international funding. And not by selling bits of the Amazon or adopt-an-orangutan programmes on the internet, but by providing the subsistence farmers with a stipend to look after their bit, protecting critical forest & habitat through regulation and preventing sale to large scale producers and developers, etc.

Individuals in the UK can't have much direct impact on that, but they can give money to organisations that campaign for change, ask their representatives to put pressure on the governments, etc.

[Mike Sales]

Branson,Bezos and Musk could quite possible end a lot of problems for a lot of people...but.....it's not their job or moral obligation to do so!

Is it not a moral obligation? If I witnessed either yourself or a member of your family, drowning or attacked by thieves or requiring first aid assistance, is there not a moral obligation for me to assist in order to help them from danger and then summon further assistance?

Give the question, and yourself, a degree of credit should you answer.

Equally if you or your family were starving, due to crop failures due to global warming would there not be a measure of moral obligation from me, as I drove the car which contributed, as I consumed goods which contributed, as I heated my house that contributed to the change in weather system which caused that failure.

It seems very much to me, that the level of moral obligation set for our consumerist society, has been determined by the same set of people who are financially rich and privileged, and that this level has been set to their advantage.

No man is an island,
entire of itself;
every man is a piece of the continent,
a part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less,
as well as if a promontory were.
as well as if a manor of thy friend’s
or of thine own were.
Any man’s death diminishes me,
because I am involved in mankind;
and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls;
it tolls for thee.

[Jdsk]

If I witnessed either yourself or a member of your family, drowning or attacked by thieves or requiring first aid assistance, is there not a moral obligation for me to assist in order to help them from danger and then summon further assistance?

"Statement on the humanitarian work of the RNLI in the English Channel"
https://rnli.org/news-and-media/2021/ju ... sh-channel

Includes:
'We’ve had some vile abuse thrown at us. We’ve been accused of all sorts of things. I’ve personally had personal phone calls at the lifeboat station people telling me what they think of me by bringing migrants in, but at the end of the day I reiterate we are here to save lives at sea and all the time we are here that is what we will carry on doing."

Jonathan

[Ben@Forest]

But subsistence farmers clear land because they can sell the wood, and use the land for something which they hope will make them more than subsistence farmers, like grazing cattle, or raising cash crops.

The problem is that doesn't happen. Tropical soils in particular are thin and have low nutrient status. When you remove forest the top humic layers, which recycle plant vegetation are lost, so the farmer moves onto the next bit of forest leaving a trashed bit of land behind him.

Neolithic man in the British Isles did this too, but our mineral soils are deeper and hold more nutrients, they mostly continue to be farmed. We need people who are a lot poorer than us not to do what our ancestors did, especially since their soils are not sustainable.

[Oldjohnw]

First they came for the gypsies, then the National Trust, then the RNLI.

Then they came for me but there was no one left to defend me.

[Vorpal]

But subsistence farmers clear land because they can sell the wood, and use the land for something which they hope will make them more than subsistence farmers, like grazing cattle, or raising cash crops.

The problem is that doesn't happen. Tropical soils in particular are thin and have low nutrient status. When you remove forest the top humic layers, which recycle plant vegetation are lost, so the farmer moves onto the next bit of forest leaving a trashed bit of land behind him.

Neolithic man in the British Isles did this too, but our mineral soils are deeper and hold more nutrients, they mostly continue to be farmed. We need people who are a lot poorer than us not to do what our ancestors did, especially since their soils are not sustainable.

It seems to work for people in Borneo, where they grow oil palms. Not only is illegal logging profitable, but people are poor & jobs are scarce. Most people welcome any jobs, whether the work is legal or not. Convincing them that it is more profitable to leave the forest in place is a hard sell.

Cattle ranching is the driving force behind the destruction of the Amazon. This, in turn is driven by the international market for beef. As I understand it, the plants that grow in place of forest is grazeable, but only for a few years, driving further destruction.

[Stradageek]

Simple facts:

In terms of charitable donations as a percentage of income the poor are more generous than the rich, just try any search using this as a question

Is it true that If you tax the rich they will run away and hide their money? Well, they may be able to now but if the governments of the world really wanted to stop this practice they could do it tomorrow... the problem is that most governments are owned by this same 'Parasite Class'

And in answer to the threat "If you tax us we'll leave the country and take our money with us" I would say - "Can we have that in writing please?"

What do we have to lose, they contribute nothing